Journal of Threatened
Taxa | www.threatenedtaxa.org | 26 July 2025 | 17(7): 27233–27241
ISSN 0974-7907 (Online) | ISSN 0974-7893 (Print)
https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.9974.17.7.27233-27241
#9974 | Received 01 June 2025 | Final received 05 July 2025 | Finally
accepted 18 July 2025
Redescription of a
leaf-footed bug Homoeocerus glossatus Ahmad & Perveen
(Heteroptera: Coreidae) from Dhule, Maharashtra,
India
Digvijay R. Jadhav 1 ,
Archana A. Sharbidre 2 & Hemant V. Ghate 3
1,2 Department of Zoology, Savitribai
Phule Pune University, Pune, Maharashtra 411007, India.
3 P.G. Research Centre, Department
of Zoology, Modern College of Arts, Science & Commerce (Autonomous),
Shivajinagar, Pune, Maharashtra 411005, India.
1 digvijayjadhav777@gmail.com, 2
aasharbidre@gmail.com (corresponding author), 3 hemantghate@gmail.com
Editor: Anonymity requested. Date of publication: 26 July
2025 (online & print)
Citation:
Jadhav, D.R., A.A. Sharbidre & H.V. Ghate (2025). Redescription
of a leaf-footed bug Homoeocerus glossatus Ahmad & Perveen
(Heteroptera: Coreidae) from Dhule, Maharashtra,
India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 17(7): 27233–27241. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.9974.17.7.27233-27241
Copyright: © Jadhav et al. 2025. Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
JoTT allows unrestricted use, reproduction, and
distribution of this article in any medium by providing adequate credit to the
author(s) and the source of publication.
Funding: Self-funded.
Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests.
Author details: Digvijay R. Jadhav is a PhD research scholar at Department of Zoology, Savitribai Phule Pune University Pune. Archana A. Sharbidre is associate professor at the Department of Zoology, Savitribai Phule Pune University Pune. Hemant V. Ghate is a retired professor of zoology pursuing taxonomical work at Modern College.
Author contributions: Jadhav collected the specimens, helped in dissection, photography, preparation of manuscript, and preparation of illustrations. All authors wrote the manuscript.
Acknowledgements: Authors are thankful to the head of the Department of Physics, Savitribai Phule Pune University, for permission to do SEM work; special thanks to Mr. Shinde for excellent images and technical assistance
with SEM. HVG is particularly grateful to Pierre Moulet (France) for confirming our observations, Petr Kment (Czech Republic) for sharing an important paper and to K.D. Prathapan (Kerala, India) for sending some bug specimens. We thank S.I.A. Shah and S.H.A. Zeidi (Pakistan) for providing a relevant paper. We acknowledge Dr. Shruti Paripatyadar for her help in preparation of illustrations and plates. The authors are indebted to the authorities of Modern College, Shivajinagar and Department of Zoology, Savitribai Phule Pune University, for facilities, and encouragement.
Abstract: We redescribe
Homoeocerus glossatus
Ahmad & Perveen, 1994 based on specimens from Navadevi, Shirpur (District
Dhule, Maharashtra), collected in August 2024, with detailed digital
illustrations of morphology, including genitalia, improving the limited
original description. We also record host plant of the species to be Milletia pinnata
(L.) Panigrahi, Fabaceae. This species was originally
described based on specimens collected from Kerala, southern India and
deposited in ‘National Museum of Natural History’, Washington DC, USA, but was
not included in the recent checklist of Coreoidea of
India. Although not recorded again from any part of India, after original description,
this species has now been noted from Maharashtra, from places such as Dhule and
Pune for the first time, based on previous collections.
Keywords: Coreinae,
Homoeocerini, host plant, malabar,
morphology, Pongamia, range extension, true
bugs.
INTRODUCTION
Genus Homoeocerus,
Burmeister (1835) is distributed in the Ethiopian, Eastern Palearctic, and
Oriental regions. Distant listed about 43 species while compiling Fauna of
British India volumes and also commented on 3–4 doubtful species (Distant 1902,
1908, 1918). Many of these species mentioned by Distant are described from
places which are no longer part of the present Indian territory. In fact,
Distant listed or described all the species under the genus Homoeocerus
and treated many genera like Prismatocerus and
Tliponius as synonyms under Homoeocerus. Many of these genera are resurrected
and the various included species, their known localities, their synonyms, and
relevant literature,
have been detailed in Coreoidea Species
File (CoreoideaSF Team 2025, Coreoidea
Species File Online Version). Prabakar (2013) published a list of coreids and their distribution in India. This list does not
include all the species known from India, as indicated earlier (Jadhav et al.
2021); the species H. glossatus, which is redescribed here, is also not listed by Prabakar (2013). A
complete checklist of Coreoidea of India needs to be
compiled.
A few specimens of Homoeocerus collected from Navadevi,
Shirpur (Dhule, Maharashtra), in August 2024, and
some previous collections with one of us (HVG), were identified as Homoeocerus glossatus
Ahmad & Perveen, 1994 on the basis of key and
description given by Perveen (1991, unpublished PhD
thesis) and Ahmad & Perveen (1994).
We are redescribing
the species H. glossatus with several
digital colour illustrations of morphology, including
that of male, and female genitalia, because the original description provided
only a few line drawings.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Specimens were collected from Navadevi, Shirpur, Dhule District
(Maharashtra, India) by hand picking from its host plant Milletia
pinnata (locally called as ‘Karanj’).
Male and female specimens were collected from the same population, although
mating was not observed. Specimens were preserved in 70% alcohol and brought to
Modern College, Pune for further study. Detailed methods for study are outlined
earlier in Jadhav et al. (2021). For scanning electron microscopy (SEM), parts
of specimen were cleaned with absolute alcohol, dried thoroughly and mounted on
stub with conducting carbon tape, coated with platinum at a thickness of about
10 nm, scanned and photographed using a JEOL JSM-6360A analytical scanning
electron microscope.
Material studied: Two females and
one male from Shirpur, Dhule (coll.: D. Jadhav,
August 2024) and one female, from Savitribai Phule Pune University Campus
(coll.: D. Jadhav, February 2025). Previously collected material: one female
from Pune University campus (November 2009), on Millettia;
one female, Vellayani, Kerala (coll.: Rajan, February 2017); one female Amba valley (Student
coll., November 2017); one female, Shirur, (coll.: B.
Sarode; September 2017); one male, Tamhini ,
Mulshi, Pune (Student coll.: August 2017).
RESULTS
Taxonomy
Family Coreidae Leach, 1815
Subfamily Coreinae
Leach, 1815
Tribe Homoeocerini
Amyot & Serville, 1843
Genus Homoeocerus
Burmeister, 1835
Species Homoeocerus
glossatus Ahmad & Perveen,1994
Taxonomical placement follows Coreoidea Species File online version.
Redescription
Size, colouration,
and vestiture
Elongate bug of about 18 mm, male
slightly smaller, and slender than female. Legs slender, short; none of the
femora swollen or with spines underneath; hind femora not passing apex of
abdomen.
Overall ochraceous, dorsally
blackly punctate, with magenta tinge on antennae, pronotum, scutellum,
abdominal tergites, clavus, and corium. Ventrally uniformly pale yellow.
Antennae with II and III antennomeres slightly fuscus
at apex while IV antennomere pale in basal half and fuscus
in apical half. Older specimens are faded and show only slight tinge of reddish
or magenta colouration while fresh specimens show
darker magenta colouration. Fine, short, sparse, adpressed setae present all over body. Head with black setigerous granules in anterior half. Antennae also with
fine black setigerous granules (Image 3A,B), except fourth segment which has only fine, short
setae. Eyes pale brown (appear whitish in older specimens), ocelli reddish.
Labium pale with its tip black. Pronotum with broadly pale lateral margin and
one longitudinal, median levigate pale line (Image 1A). Corium with one large
and one small pale yellow levigate spots on inner margin, close to membrane
(these spots very indistinct in some specimens after drying); scattered setigerous granules also present on corium (Image 3B,C). Membrane translucent with multiple parallel veins, its
basal angle fuscus (Image 1). Abdomen dorsally partly
ochraceous with large patches of bilaterally symmetrical magenta patches on all
tergites (Image 4D), ventrally ochraceous; spiracles either black or dark brown
(Image 2C).
All legs uniformly pale cream,
with fine punctures, and translucent, sparse, adpressed
setae on femora; setae on tibia longer, darker, and denser in distal third
portion. Tarsal segments densely setose with dark
setae dorsally and pale setae ventrally. Claw tips black.
Structure
Head
Broader than long due to large
eyes. Shape more or less rectangular, excluding eyes. Antenniferous
tubercles large, situated anteriorly on either side of clypeus. Dorsally
clypeus visible only as small triangle. A short, median, longitudinal sulcus
present behind base of clypeus but not continued behind between eyes. Eyes
large, globose, situated close to anterior border of pronotum. Ocelli slightly
bulging, closer to eyes than to each other. Antennae long, first segment
(scape) stout, second (pedicel), and third slender, fourth spindle shaped, and
slightly thicker (Image 1A,B; 2A). Labium short,
passing fore coxae; bucculae short (Image 2B).
Thorax
Pronotum rhomboidal, more than two and half
times broad at humeral angles than at anterior angles, much broader than long,
slightly declivous; pronotal surface densely and
coarsely punctured, especially posterior to calli;
anterior angles subacute, anterolateral margin straight, not crenulate;
anterior margin slightly concave behind head; humeral angles slightly laterally
produced, prominent but subacute; posterolateral margin gently sinuate,
posterior margin straight over scutellum. Callar
region of pronotum slightly depressed, more wrinkled than remaining part.
Prosternum medially smooth, sulcate; mesosternum
medially smooth, shallowly sulcate; metasternum
medially smooth, convex; pro-, meso- and metapleural
areas coarsely, and densely punctured (Image 2A, B). Metathoracic scent gland
opening with elongate peritreme, anterior projection
rounded, posterior projection subacute; evaporatorium
small (Image 2C,D). Scutellum triangular, densely, and
coarsely punctured, slightly longer than broad, with acute apex. Hemelytra with
clavus showing almost similar punctures; corium also coarsely punctured but
punctures slightly less dense in basal half than in distal half, its veins
prominent; membrane with typical parallel veins.
Pre-genital abdomen
Dorsally connexivum
well-marked from adjacent tergites, not covered over fully by hemelytra.
Ventrally connexivum not well-marked from adjacent sternites, very finely wrinkled but without distinct
punctures. In male as well as in female, abdomen gradually narrowed from sixth
segment to apex, segmental boundaries distinct. Spiracles slightly closer to
anterior margin than lateral margin of segment.
Genital segments in male and
female
Ventral side of abdomen in male
and female are illustrated (Image 4A–C). In male, seventh sternite
is deeply emarginate; pygophore, with its tongue like
posterior process which can be seen in ventral (Image 4C,5A) and posterior
view; eighth sternum is not visible. Hemelytra almost completely cover pygophore. Sometimes pygophore
protrudes out automatically during preservation and hence it may be partly seen
from dorsal side.
Detached
pygophore is broadly
oval, cup-like, ventrally convex, and dorsally flattened, gradually
narrowed posteriorly, its distal opening dorsal; posteroventral
margin with tongue like median projection (TP) and 1+1 subacute or rounded,
lateral projections; entire ventral surface and rim with moderately long,
moderately dense, setae (Image 5B,C,D). Dorsally pygophore
with basal membranous area which includes two sclerotized lateral patches (SP),
one on either side of midline; dorsal bridge (DB) narrow, anterior to these
patches (Image 5B). Phallus with well-developed articulatory apparatus, phallotheca and conjunctiva membranous (Image 5E). There is
one sclerotized appendage at base of vesica dorsolaterally, with one long acute process. There is one
pair of sclerotized ventral processes and pair of lateral, elongate, partially
sclerotized processes. Boundaries of all the processes of conjunctiva are not
clear due to unsuccessful inflation of aedeagus.
Female terminalia,
as seen in ventral view, show seventh sternum slightly depressed in posterior
half, with its posterior margin sinuate, and medially cleft in distal one fifth
up to triangular plica; first, large, and triangular gonocoxa
(or valvifer) 8 (gx8) is situated just behind the sinuate border of seventh
sternum; laterotergites 8 (lt8) with its spiracle and
laterotergites 9 (lt9), are seen laterally (Image
4A,B); wide, oval opening of tenth segment (=proctiger)
is seen apically. Removal of tergites show the relation of different parts of
female genitalia in dorsal view: the spermatheca with tubular seminal
receptacle, tightly coiled part, large ampulla, and also very long spermathecal
duct, as shown here; different parts, such as: ring sclerites (RS), laterotergites (lt), and
valvifers or gonocoxae (gx)
are also shown here (Image 6A). Separated gonocoxae
eight and nine, along with associated valvulae or gonapophyses (gp8 and gp9) are illustrated (Image 6B), note
setose margin of gonapophyses,
and spiracle on eighth laterotergite.
Measurements (M/F) in mm (1 male / 1 female).
Total length – 16/18.5. Head length
mediodorsally – 1.5/1.5; head width at eye – 2/2; head width between eyes –
1/1.05; antenna: first segment – 3.5/3.5; second segment – 4.5/4.5; third
segment – abnormal/2.75; fourth segment – abnormal/3; labium: first segment –
0.75/0.75; second segment- 0.75/0.75; third segment – 1/1; fourth segment –
1.12/1.12; pronotum breadth at anterior angles – 1.6/1.75; pronotum width at
humeral angles – 4.55/5.25; median length of pronotum – 3.5/3.75; scutellum
width at base – 2.1/2mm; scutellum median length – 2.25/2.3; hemelytra total
length–13 /14; legs: fore coxa – 0.5/0.35; fore femur – 4.5/3.75; fore tibia –
3.5/3.6; tarsus with claw – 2/2.25; mid coxa – 0.5/0.75; mid femur – 4/4.25;
mid tibia – 3.75/4.1; tarsus with claw – 2/2; hind coxa – 0.75/0.5; hind femur
– 5.5/6.5; hind tibia – 5.5/5.9; tarsus with claw – 2.25/2.5.
DISCUSSION
Ahmad & Perveen
(1994) described Homoeocerus glossatus based on seven specimens collected by P. S.
Nathan from ‘Malabar, Malayan Forest, 100 ft’, southern India, in September
1952 (Male holotype deposited at National Museum of National History, Washington
DC); one female, with the same collection details, was designated as allotype;
in addition, five more females (paratypes?) collected from ‘Charangade,
3500 ft’ (Nilgiri Hills part, Tamil Nadu), southern
India, in 1950, were also studied by them. We also studied a female specimen
collected from Vellayani, Kerala, and it is
identical.
Our male as well as female
specimens, including structure of their genitalia, completely match with the
original description, and illustrations given by Perveen
(1991), and Ahmad & Perveen (1994), and so there
is no doubt about the identity of the species. The original description is
supplied with a few line drawings, here we are providing many additional
details of morphology with several digital photographs; for example, the female
genitalia are only illustrated as a gross (undissected) ventral view of apex of
abdomen while we are presenting a complete in situ view of female genitalia as
well as details of gonocoxae (= valvifers), and gonapophyses (= valvulae) after
dissection. Spermatheca is also fully illustrated with its long duct. Kumar
(1965) illustrated similar and comparable structures, giving details of
dissected female genitalia in Homoeocerini, in two
related species: 1) Homoeocerus lacertosus Distant [= Homoeocerus (Anacanthocoris) lacertosus Distant,
1889] and 2) Anacanthocoris striicornis Scott (= Homoeocerus (Anacanthocoris) striicornis Scott,
1874); Kumar (1965) erroneously treated that under Dasynini
(although initial list in the same paper included it correctly under Homoeocerini) (CoreoideaSF Team
2025).
This species was named as H.
glossatus because of tongue like projection of
the posteroventral margin of the pygophore,
as has been shown here in several illustrations. Features of phallus, parameres, and female terminalia
are also matching with figures given by the original authors. The spermatheca
is typically of ‘A III types’ with a long spermathecal
duct, as illustrated for Coreinae / Homoeocerini, in a comprehensive work on Coreidae
spermatheca (Pluot-Sigwalt & Moulet
2020).
Our specimens come from more
northern places as compared to the type locality -Kerala (‘Malabar’, old name
for the major part of the coast of present Kerala, in Western Ghats; exact
locality is not given in original paper). The presence of this species in
Maharashtra is a considerable northward extension of the species, and it is
from areas that are very wet (Mulshi) or relatively
semi-arid (Dhule) or intermediate (Pune) in climatic conditions. It is quite
likely that the species is more wide-spread in
Maharashtra and elsewhere, as is evident from material studied. Perveen (1991) and Ahmad & Perveen
(1994) did not mention the host plant. All of the specimens in Shirpur (coll. D. Jadhav) were found to be associated with Milletia pinnata
(former name Pongamia pinnata,
locally known as Karanj, in Marathi); host
plants for other specimens/places were not recorded, however, a female
collected in Pune also was also associated with Milletia.
Fabaceae plants are known to attract some other Homoeocerus
species as well (Hemant Ghate, unpublished data).
This is also the first report of the species after its original description. A
lack of surveys and taxonomic expertise has affected work on Coreoidea as well as other Heteroptera.
Perveen (1991) studied tribe Homoeocerini from Indian subcontinent and presented
detailed and a well-illustrated work on various species of Homoeocerus. There are only a few recent papers giving
details of morphology of Indian Coreoidea, and
especially Homoeocerus, from India. A
PhD thesis by Gupta (2012), includes description of morphology (including
genitalia) of ten species of Homoeocerus from
Punjab (India), along with photos, but H. glossatus
was not included in that study.
Various species included under Homoeocerus in Distant’s
fauna volumes (cited above) are very briefly described or redescribed.
It is often difficult to identify them due to lack of: a) recent keys, b)
detailed redescriptions / illustrations and c)
knowledge about within-species variations. Although redescription
of some of the Indian species has been done earlier by Perveen
(1991) in her PhD thesis, much additional work is necessary.
FOR
IMAGES - - CLICK HERE FOR FULL PDF
REFERENCES
Amyot, C.J.B. & A. Serville (1843). Histoire Naturelle
des Insectes Hemipteres. Librairie
Encyclopedique de Roret,
Paris, 675 pp.
Ahmad I.
& R. Perveen (1994). A revision of squash bug
subgroup Lacertosus Distant of the genus Homoeocerus Burmeister (Hemiptera: Coreidae) with
new record and description of new species from Indo-Pakistan subcontinent. Proceedings
of Pakistan Congress of Zoology 14: 157–169
Burmeister,
H. (1835). Handbuch der Entomologie.
Zweiter Band, Besondere
Entomologie, Rhynchota.
Berlin, 400 pp.
CoreoideaSF Team (2025). Coreoidea Species File Online. Version 5.0/5.0. Available
from: http://Coreoidea.SpeciesFile.org. Accessed on vi 2025
Distant, W.L.
(1902). The Fauna
of British India including Ceylon and Burma. Rhynchota
Vol. I (Heteroptera). Taylor and Francis, London, 438
pp.
Distant, W.L.
(1908). The Fauna of
British India including Ceylon and Burma. Rhynchota
Vol. IV (Homoptera and Appendix). Taylor and Francis,
London, 501 pp.
Distant, W.L.
(1918). The Fauna
of British India including Ceylon and Burma. Rhynchota
Vol. VII (Homoptera: Appendix; Heteroptera:
Addenda). Taylor and Francis, London, 210 pp.
Gupta, R. (2012) Taxonomic studies
on families Coreidae and Lygaeidae (Hemiptera: Heteroptera)
from North India, supplemented with rapid markers. Unpublished PhD thesis
submitted to the Punjabi University, Patiala, 361 pp + 731 figs. http://hdl.handle.net/10603/10215
Jadhav, D.R.,
R.R. Khairnar, B.V. Sarode,
S.S. Boyane & H.V. Ghate
(2021). Redescription of the bug Aschistocoris
brevicornis (Heteroptera:
Coreidae) and first report on its life history from northern Maharashtra,
India. Journal of Threatened Taxa 13(3): 17930–17938. https://doi.org/10.11609/jott.6763.13.3.17930-17938
Kumar, R.
(1965). Aspects of
the morphology of Coreoidea and their value in its
higher classification. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Queensland
LXXVI (3): 27–91.
Leach, W.E.
(1815). Entomology,
Hemiptera, pp. 57–192. In: Brewster, D. (ed).
Edinburgh Encyclopedia - Vol. 9. Edinburg, Scotland, 384 pp.
Perveen, R. (1991). Taxonomic study of tribe Homoeocerini Amyot & Serville (Heteroptera: Coreidae)
from Indo-Pakistan Subcontinent. (Unpublished PhD Thesis submitted to the
University of Karachi, Pakistan), 406 pp.
Pluot-Sigwalt, D. & P. Moulet
(2020).
Morphological types of spermatheca in Coreidae: bearing on intra-familial
classification and tribal-groupings (Hemiptera: Heteroptera).
Zootaxa 4834(4): 451–501. https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.4834.4.1
Prabakar, D.
(2013). The
biogeographical distribution of species of the superfamily Coreoidea : Hemiptera in
India. Records of the Zoological Survey of India 113(4): 103–128. https://doi.org/10.26515/rzsi/v113/i4/2013/121746
Scott, J. (1874). On a collection of Hemiptera Heteroptera from Japan. Descriptions of various new genera
and species. The Annals and Magazine of Natural History 14(4th
series): 360–365